The sorry state of American journalism is on full display in the
coverage by the corporate media of the ongoing crisis surrounding Iran’s
nuclear fuel program.

The leaders of both Israel and the U.S. have publicly threatened to
attack Iran -- Israel saying it could do so within weeks, President
Obama warning that he would consider attacking Iran militarily if he
were convinced that that nation was building an atomic bomb.

Not once, in reporting on these threats of aggressive war by Israel
and/or the United States, has any major U.S. news organization, in print
or on the air, included any reference to the U.N. Charter or to the
fact that what is being contemplated is an invasion by Israel or the
United States of a country that has not even been shown to be producing
or planning to produce a nuclear weapon, much less to be in possession
of one.

Not once, in any of these daily reports on the Iran “crisis,”
has any report by these news organizations -- including National Public
Radio -- interviewed a source who could point out that, what is being
discussed is the most serious of all war crimes: the crime against peace
(the same crime that led to the hanging, after World War II, of several
military leaders in Japan and Germany).

The law itself is crystal clear. Under the UN Charter it is the
ultimate war crime for a nation to initiate an aggressive war against
another country that has not attacked it or that does not pose an
“imminent threat” of attack. And given that even Israeli and US
intelligence officials concede that Iran is not at this time making a
bomb, and thus cannot hope to have a working one even a year from now
were they to begin a crash program, there is simply no imminent threat.

Even when a perfect opportunity arrived for making this point -- a
public statement Feb. 27 by Brazil’s Foreign Minister Antonio Patriota,
at the United Nations, reminding UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon that
an attack by Israel or the US on Iran would be “contrary to
international law,” and urging Ban to address the issue -- this
trenchant and news-worthy warning was totally blacked out by the U.S.
corporate news media.

There was no news report on Patriota’s warning in the Washington Post, the New York Times or other major newspapers. There was no mention of it on CNN or other major news stations either.

As far as most Americans go, the statement by the foreign minister of
one of the world’s biggest nations, and a leader among the developing
nations of the world, never happened.

Instead, the American news media have been running article after
article, often on page one above the fold, or as the lead item on the
hour, debating when Israel might attack Iran, whether the U.S. would come to Israel’s aid if it did attack, or if after it attacked, Iran retaliated by firing missiles at Israel, the US would join
Israel. Even worse, the media have been running and airing stories
quoting Pentagon sources and retired military personnel (often still on
the Pentagon payroll) describing how an Israeli or a US attack on Iran would likely be conducted. All this without mentioning the criminality of it all.

It’s as though we were siting in Germany in 1938, reading articles
in the local newspapers speculating about how Germany’s future attack on
Poland would be conducted, or when and how the Blitzkrieg against the
Low Countries would play out.

What we are getting is not news. It is propaganda. The Nazi
propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels, had he not killed himself to avoid
capture and execution for war crimes by the Allies at the end of the
war, would surely marvel at how his methods are being aped and refined
by the media in one of his leading democratic enemies some seven decades
after he put the German media in service to the Third Reich.

At least the Los Angeles Times belatedly, on March 5, ran an op-ed article by Yale Law professor Bruce Ackerman
making the point that a US attack on Iran would be both a war crime and
a violation of US law. As he explains, since the US is a signatory of
the UN Charter--a treaty ratified by the Senate -- its provisions
banning aggressive wars have become, under Article II of the US
Constitution, an integral part of US law.

Ackerman notes that in 1981, when Israel unilaterally bombed and
destroyed the Osirik nuclear reactor in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, the US
voted for a unanimous UN Security Council Resolution condemning that
attack, and he quoted then British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher,
whose country also voted for the resolution, as saying, “Armed attack in
such circumstances cannot be justified. It represents a grave breach of
international law.”

But why is such information as Ackerman’s only appearing on the L.A. Times opinion page?

Ackerman is an authority on international law at one of the
pre-eminent law schools in the country. He should be getting quoted as
an authority in news articles where attacking Iran is being discussed.
What he says about the U.N. Charter and about a war of aggression being
flat-out illegal is not an opinion. It is a fact. He and this important
fact belong on the news pages.

Bad enough that he is being relegated by the editors of the Los Angeles Times
to the opinion page ghetto, but he is being totally ignored by the
editors of other major news organizations. He is too dangerous even for
their opinion pages.

When this kind of thing happens, it is clear that what passes for
mainstream journalism in the US is not really journalism at all. It is
propaganda--in this case pro-Israel, pro-war propaganda. That’s why we
see calls in the US media for Iran to submit to UN inspection of its
entire nuclear program, while no similar demand is made of Israel, which
has some 300 nuclear weapons, and which has never allowed in any
inspectors.

There is no difference between the war-mongering coverage by the
mainstream media with respect to Iran today and the war-mongering
coverage we experienced in 2002-2003 in the run-up to another criminal
war of aggression, the Bush/Cheney invasion of Iraq -- another country
that posed no imminent threat to the United States.

Fortunately Americans willing to make the effort do have other
sources of news. They could read the alternative US media, like this
publication or perhaps look abroad, say at the Irish News Beacon
online, where Patriota’s statement was reported properly as significant
news. Unfortunately, most Americans are content to passively receive
their “news” as it is vetted, twisted and spoon-fed to them from the
corporate propaganda machine, though. This may explain why polls show
more than 50 percent of Americans to be in support of a campaign to bomb
Iran, while only 19 percent of Israelis, who still have real newspapers
and real journalists at least, want to do the same thing.